Posted on 05/25/2009 3:39:41 PM PDT by JoeProBono
A woman and her 13-year-old son who were on the run from court-ordered cancer treatment for the boy have returned to Minnesota, the Brown County Sheriff's Office said Monday.
"Daniel Hauser and his mother have been returned to Minnesota," according to a news release. It did not reveal any additional details, but said there would be a news conference Monday evening.
The FBI's affidavit in support of an arrest warrant for Colleen alleges she fled the state Tuesday to avoid being prosecuted on two state counts of depriving another of custodial or parental rights in Brown County.
The FBI said the pair flew from Minnesota to Los Angeles last Tuesday on Sun Country Airlines. Investigators suspected they might have headed to one of a number of alternative cancer clinics in northern Mexico.
You are reading an article written by the AP press. When was the last time you are certain that they were being truthful or factual? Ever?
When a “treatment” is no treatment at all with no basis in scientific fact, no record of success and no basis in authentic belief.
Ionized water and organic greens is not a treatment, it’s wishful thinking. The boy admitted to the judge that he knew nothing about his supposed Indian religion except he was not supposed to harm himself. He also admitted that his family goes to Mass twice a month, has home services on the Sundays they don’t go to Mass and says the rosary daily. Learning disabled and can’t read means he can’t make competent and informed decisions for himself and is entirely dependant on his mother and totally influenced by her.
The mother was reported by the boy’s regular pediatrician when they failed to keep additional appointments for chemo.
Child neglect and abuse have ALWAYS been illegal and the state is acting on long standing common law and written statutes in the matter. Had the boy been considered competent or the mother presented a rational alternative treatment (say targeted radiation as others have done before) rather than a “diet” she admits she researched on the internet (but it’s on the internet, it must be true!) the courts might not have made the determination of medical negligence.
That is not what this article says. It states that custody was given to family services.
>>It’s really too bad that you believe that. You go ahead and believe this kid has no right to say what can be done to him.<<
Yes I do believe that. Children are just that. They rely on adults to help them make it through childhood. It is a piss-poor parent who makes or even allows children to make decisions that parents are supposed to make.
And this one is developmentally disabled, so you are talking about an emotional age much younger.
The fact don’t accept my analogy is irreverent. I guess you approve of abortion because stopping it infringes on the “rights” of the parents to decide the life or death of the baby.
And the fathers right in this case? If the boy is 13 is he old enough to understand what rejection of treatment really means? When do his rights as a patient kick in?
I have no idea what dad’s wishes or rights are in this case. He certainly, in my opinion, would have a say, if he were married to the mother and the legal father of the child. Patient rights. I suppose those would kick in at majority. Eighteen in most countries.
Do you have better, more accurate facts at hands, or this merely conjecture on your part to bolster a failing argument?
My mother in law.
Just in case you didn’t know when the doctors give a certain n% what they mean is the five/ten year survival rate.
Of course its great your brother is still here but if he knew now what he knows now, with the complications and such would he have chosen a different path.
Who said he had a 90% cure rate? And who said that the dad wanted him to have treatment?
I saw the dad on the news and he wasn’t exactly sorry the wife and son ran.
>>You are reading an article written by the AP press. When was the last time you are certain that they were being truthful or factual? Ever?
Which fact are they distorting? The recovery rate? You don’t have Google?
>>Water is something that we provide like food to healthy children. It is not a treatment.
How about insulin? I had to take insulin shots and I hated it. Is it OK to withhold insulin because the kid doesn’t like to inject himself?
How about a bone marrow transplant to cure leukemia? Almost 100% cure rate if you get a match. Very painful. OK to withhold that treatment?
I wouldnt, but if parents want to they should be able to direct their child’s medical care.
He is 82. Doctor pushed hard to get him
started right away. He said no. He’d rather live
out his days in dignity and enjoyment. And I don’t
blame him.
The elderly are wonderful lab rats.
//Even more uncomfortable with the state making the decision for the family//
I hear you. These court imposed medical procedures are way over the line (its bad enough what they do to people in the penal installations), and they dont give the kid any credit/influence on his destiny.
Next thing down the line they might mandate forced organ transplants (multiple) to ‘save the life of a minor’. Imagine that horror if if was forced upon you.
They don't; neither do their kids. They understand nutrition, follow it, and teach it. Most of all they reject the death culture that you embrace.
Want to die young? Make it a point to go to the doctor often; they'll find your poison sooner or later.
>>Of course its great your brother is still here but if he knew now what he knows now, with the complications and such would he have chosen a different path.
Absolutely not. But since neither you nor I have been throught it personally, we have to evaluate it through the prism of our acquaintance with those who have.
Like I said, I know of 3 successes, the last of which was a few months with only occasional problems with the classic chemo side effects.
How long ago was your MIL? They have been steadily improving chemo and have made significant breakthroughs in minimizing side-effects and maximizing effectiveness in the last few years.
If you will notice most people who are told by the government what to do with their children are people with no political pull.
Do you think an Obama, Clinton, Kennedy, etc. would be told by any government agency what they should do with THEIR CHILDREN?! HELL NO!
It’s only for the ‘little people’ that have no rights to be told by the ‘all knowing geniuses’ of the government what is best for you!
I am, in truth, wondering what is correct. I don’t trust the AP.
>>Want to die young? Make it a point to go to the doctor often; they’ll find your poison sooner or later.<<
I will be glad to stand and applaud when they take your kids away to foster care and you away in handcuffs. You are certifiable.
His case has nothing to do with this case. Totally different scenarios.
How do you feel about this particular case?
It’s only for the ‘little people’ that have no rights to be told by the ‘all knowing geniuses’ of the government what is best for you!
I noticed that too. It is how the system gets clients.
You misunderstand. I have gone “through it”. Thats why I asked you if you wanted to know my experience.
My MIL had radiation treatment, which is what we were talking about.
Because some other poster said “its not that bad”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.